Interpreting 'illegal' divides sides

By LEAH RAE
THE JOURNAL NEWS

It's probably the favorite slogan in the immigration debate:
What part of illegal don't you understand?


The question is asked rhetorically, but there really is a "part of illegal" that the two sides understand differently. And that difference continues to polarize the discussion.


Opponents of the recent immigration reform proposals in Congress believe anyone in the United States without authorization is a criminal, undeserving of any special deals.


People on the other side see undocumented workers as people who want to play by the rules; it's just that the rules give unskilled workers little chance to immigrate legally to the United States.


Most immigration violations are civil, not criminal, in nature, said Philip Berns, an immigration attorney in Stamford, Conn. The common civil violations - overstaying a visa, remaining here and working without authorization - are on par with jaywalking, paying your taxes late or littering, at least judging by the legal consequences, he said.


Deportation, which seems like a criminal penalty, is technically a "remedy." A remedy means "there is a situation that should not exist, and you take the steps necessary to make sure that the situation no longer exists," Berns said. For example, if a homeowner builds a wall that crosses onto a neighbor's property, the "remedy" is to remove that portion of the wall.


But there are criminal charges and penalties for other immigration violations. Crossing the border without inspection is a misdemeanor, and re-entering the country after a deportation order is a felony. Knowingly hiring an unauthorized immigrant can bring fines of up to $11,000 per employee.


Immigration-control activists pushed to turn unlawful presence into a felony crime, and the House of Representatives passed a bill to that effect in December 2005. But a pro-immigrant movement took to the streets, and the bill ended there.


Immigration violations are no minor matter, said Jim Russell, a Hawthorne resident who lobbies for immigration enforcement. "I think that to knowingly violate a rule, even if it's civil in nature, in this regard it's a serious action," he said. "It's something that has a long-term effect on the host nation."


Russell said he's not in favor of changing the laws, but enforcing the ones already on the books.


Reach Leah Rae at
lrae@lohud.com

thejournalnews.com